06 Electoral Predictions?

Off Topic Politics and World Issues
41

[quote]100meters wrote:
hedo wrote:
100meters wrote:
hedo wrote:
100meters wrote:
BostonBarrister wrote:
hedo wrote:

How about Santorum vs. Casey in Pa.?

Santorum is closing the gap, so that one can’t just be penciled in as a Dem pick up. It will be extremely close, that’s about as comfortable as I am in making a call at this point.

It doesn’t seem like he’s closing the gap at 18 points back does it?
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-08-31-midterm-elections_x.htm
of course Santorum is a nut so maybe he thinks he’s closing the gap. Still, he’s got time to pull it out…

Seems like your employer ,the DNC, isn’t even running with that poll. It’s dated from some time ago.

The actual Gap is less then 5pts., about the margin of error, but you knew that already didn’t you? It’s been the all the talk at Daily Kos.

It’s dountful Casey will stop the slide since he is about as charismatic as a block of wood. The more voters get to know him, the less they like him.

Sound familiar? Kind of like those days on the campaign trail with Howie isn’t it?

Ok, DNC, daily kos, good Hedo! You forgot moveon!

All right I apologize for posting the latest relevant information to casey v. santorum. What was I thinking? Santorum is actually ahead like Harris right? Again sorry to all wingnuts.

It’s not the latest. Look on any of your moonbat sites or the pollster himself.

In fact the candidates will debate this Sunday. The political talk is the lead that has dissapeared in the past 8 weeks. Look it up or better yet tune in.

The lead went away because the candidates are now on the trail and the Pa. voters do not like Casey. It’s a Howard Dean scenario. The more he campaigns the worse his numbers get.

Anyway if a Democrat doesn’t have a 10 pt. lead on election eve he doesn’t seem to win anyway. You know with the way we rig the elections and all.

Uh, which poll was released more recently? Plus you keep forgetting Santorum is a nut. You guys don’t really want Santorum to win do you?[/quote]

Of course somone with principles would be considered a nut over at DNC headquarters.

You could look it up? Your info is slanted and dated. Buy why argue with you? You just cover your ears anyway.

How’s your man Menendez doing in NJ? Let’s hear the spin on that race. Maybe a poll taken by DNC of Democratic voters…you know something that’s completely objective.

42

[quote]hedo wrote:
Of course somone with principles would be considered a nut over at DNC headquarters.

You could look it up? Your info is slanted and dated. Buy why argue with you? You just cover your ears anyway.

How’s your man Menendez doing in NJ? Let’s hear the spin on that race. Maybe a poll taken by DNC of Democratic voters…you know something that’s completely objective.
[/quote]
The poll was released Sept. 1,2006. I posted it yesterday, today is Sept. 2nd,2006. How is that dated. How is posting a gallup poll slanted?

for info on menendez kean see:

43

[quote]100meters wrote:
hedo wrote:
Of course somone with principles would be considered a nut over at DNC headquarters.

You could look it up? Your info is slanted and dated. Buy why argue with you? You just cover your ears anyway.

How’s your man Menendez doing in NJ? Let’s hear the spin on that race. Maybe a poll taken by DNC of Democratic voters…you know something that’s completely objective.

The poll was released Sept. 1,2006. I posted it yesterday, today is Sept. 2nd,2006. How is that dated. How is posting a gallup poll slanted?

for info on menendez kean see:

Actually Silly Boy the article you linked to was dated 8/31/06. The article doesn’t reference the date of the poll, however a USA Today/Gallup poll was taken, with those results the week of 8/21/06. As BB more obective link illustrates, it is off by at least 10 pts from any other major poll and at least 50% off the average of the other legitimate polls listed.

You have been caught and refuted and your response is to continue to harp on the same drivel. Booring. Try again. Maybe after the Sunday morning show. See how your man does.

44

[quote]hedo wrote:
100meters wrote:
hedo wrote:
Of course somone with principles would be considered a nut over at DNC headquarters.

You could look it up? Your info is slanted and dated. Buy why argue with you? You just cover your ears anyway.

How’s your man Menendez doing in NJ? Let’s hear the spin on that race. Maybe a poll taken by DNC of Democratic voters…you know something that’s completely objective.

The poll was released Sept. 1,2006. I posted it yesterday, today is Sept. 2nd,2006. How is that dated. How is posting a gallup poll slanted?

for info on menendez kean see:

Actually Silly Boy the article you linked to was dated 8/31/06. The article doesn’t reference the date of the poll, however a USA Today/Gallup poll was taken, with those results the week of 8/21/06. As BB more obective link illustrates, it is off by at least 10 pts from any other major poll and at least 50% off the average of the other legitimate polls listed.

You have been caught and refuted and your response is to continue to harp on the same drivel. Booring. Try again. Maybe after the Sunday morning show. See how your man does.

[/quote]

My bad, I was way off if the article was dated 2 days ago—It really can’t be defined as recent I guess, even though it’s dates (8/23-8/27) are factually the most recent in the link provided by BB.
So technically according to my understanding of recent, it would be recent. But perhaps you define recent differently than the rest of the world.
(Has hedo gone crazy recently?)

To my credit I was influenced slightly in saying recent and sept. 1, 2006 by the other link provided…

where you can clearly see on the right column:

MOST RECENT POLLS
Released 9/01/2006

PA-Sen | USA Today/Gallup
Casey (D) 56%
Santorum (R) 38%

MN-Sen | USA Today/Gallup
Klobuchar (D) 50%
Kennedy (R) 40%

MO-Sen | USA Today/Gallup
McCaskill (D) 44%
Talent (R) 50%

MT-Sen | USA Today/Gallup
Tester (D) 48%
Burns (R) 45%

OH-Sen | USA Today/Gallup
Brown (D) 46%
DeWine (R) 40%

OH-Gov | USA Today/Gallup
Strickland (D) 52%
Blackwell (R) 36%

MN-Sen | Rasmussen
Klobuchar (D) 47%
Kennedy (R) 40%

Uhh…hedo methinks you’ve been caught and refuted.

It’s funny that you’d try to convince other wingnuts that aug 31 isn’t recent(or sept 1) But it’s scary that JeffR would probably believe you.

45

[quote]100meters wrote:
hedo wrote:
100meters wrote:
hedo wrote:
Of course somone with principles would be considered a nut over at DNC headquarters.

You could look it up? Your info is slanted and dated. Buy why argue with you? You just cover your ears anyway.

How’s your man Menendez doing in NJ? Let’s hear the spin on that race. Maybe a poll taken by DNC of Democratic voters…you know something that’s completely objective.

The poll was released Sept. 1,2006. I posted it yesterday, today is Sept. 2nd,2006. How is that dated. How is posting a gallup poll slanted?

for info on menendez kean see:

Actually Silly Boy the article you linked to was dated 8/31/06. The article doesn’t reference the date of the poll, however a USA Today/Gallup poll was taken, with those results the week of 8/21/06. As BB more obective link illustrates, it is off by at least 10 pts from any other major poll and at least 50% off the average of the other legitimate polls listed.

You have been caught and refuted and your response is to continue to harp on the same drivel. Booring. Try again. Maybe after the Sunday morning show. See how your man does.

My bad, I was way off if the article was dated 2 days ago—It really can’t be defined as recent I guess, even though it’s dates (8/23-8/27) are factually the most recent in the link provided by BB.
So technically according to my understanding of recent, it would be recent. But perhaps you define recent differently than the rest of the world.
(Has hedo gone crazy recently?)

To my credit I was influenced slightly in saying recent and sept. 1, 2006 by the other link provided…

where you can clearly see on the right column:

MOST RECENT POLLS
Released 9/01/2006

PA-Sen | USA Today/Gallup
Casey (D) 56%
Santorum (R) 38%

MN-Sen | USA Today/Gallup
Klobuchar (D) 50%
Kennedy (R) 40%

MO-Sen | USA Today/Gallup
McCaskill (D) 44%
Talent (R) 50%

MT-Sen | USA Today/Gallup
Tester (D) 48%
Burns (R) 45%

OH-Sen | USA Today/Gallup
Brown (D) 46%
DeWine (R) 40%

OH-Gov | USA Today/Gallup
Strickland (D) 52%
Blackwell (R) 36%

MN-Sen | Rasmussen
Klobuchar (D) 47%
Kennedy (R) 40%

Uhh…hedo methinks you’ve been caught and refuted.

It’s funny that you’d try to convince other wingnuts that aug 31 isn’t recent(or sept 1) But it’s scary that JeffR would probably believe you.

[/quote]

That’s as close to saying " I was wrong" as you’ve ever written. That wasn’t so bad was it…get used to it. It will be worse after Nov.

Actually I was responding to what you posted. That’s crazy in your world I guess…you know sticking to the point.
Your factually wrong, you are then reading poll data with a clear bias. Myself and others have pointed that out…nothing more. The facts are Casey had a large lead. It’s been cut substantially and the momentum is not in his favor. That’s the story son. The rest is merely details at this point. Casey’s own party is concerned how he will fare head to head with Santorum, that’s why they resisted debates and joint appearances. It’s unlikely the momentum will suddenly turn.

As you are aware polling data has not been kind to the Dems for the last 6 years. A 10 pt. lead or more would be required to be comfortable and that doesn’t appear to be the case. But who knows I’m sure we have the elections rigged anyway right?

46

[quote]100meters wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
BostonBarrister wrote:
100meters wrote:
BostonBarrister wrote:
hedo wrote:

How about Santorum vs. Casey in Pa.?

Santorum is closing the gap, so that one can’t just be penciled in as a Dem pick up. It will be extremely close, that’s about as comfortable as I am in making a call at this point.

It doesn’t seem like he’s closing the gap at 18 points back does it?
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-08-31-midterm-elections_x.htm
of course Santorum is a nut so maybe he thinks he’s closing the gap. Still, he’s got time to pull it out…

You certainly know how to pull out the outlier don’t you:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2006/senate/

That was the only poll at 18% – the others two recent polls were at 8% and 5%, respectively, with earlier ones from this month at around 6% as well. Unless I missed some major political flub or there’s an amazingly effective ad campaign running, I’d guess the outlier is wrong.

It is getting real close. Pay no attention to 100meters on this one. He is way out in left field.

They are debating for the first time on Meet the Press this weekend.

Casey has been hiding trying to protect his lead and now he has to come out and fight, or at least tell us who he is and what he stands for.

Hmm… I posted a link to the most recent poll and that puts me in left field? [/quote]

http://news.mywebpal.com/news_tool_v2.cfm?show=localnews&pnpID=541&NewsID=743461&CategoryID=1441&on=1

Although he is trailing Democratic state Treasurer Robert P. Casey in polls, Santorum, in recent weeks, has narrowed Casey?s year-long double-digit lead to five points, according to a new Keystone Poll conducted by Franklin & Marshall College in Lancaster and released last Thursday. (8/31 Most Recent)

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/today/s_468828.html

Casey has held a double-digit lead for more than a year, but a recent Pittsburgh Tribune-Review poll showed the race had narrowed to a six-point lead.

I don’t put much faith in polls but the fact is most polls are showing Santorum gaining ground. That you find one that is radically different than all the others and try to pass it off shows that you are out in left field.

47

Correction

The Keystone poll was dated 8/24.

48

Hedo,
you said:

“It’s not the latest. Look on any of your moonbat sites or the pollster himself.”

Were you wrong?

yes or no?

(note to readers: I only insisted that this was a recent poll, I never debated/mentioned/discussed the outlier factor of this poll)

also hedo, I wasn’t apologizing before…obviously I was only pointing out you were factually wrong.

just a simple yes or no hedo.

49

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Correction

The Keystone poll was dated 8/24.[/quote]
Correction noted.
Uhh Hedo—still waiting…

I know its tough, but just tough it up
and do it.

Back to the topic though, I’m gonna go out on a limb and say Katherine Harris won’t win in FL…any takers?

50

[quote]100meters wrote:
Hedo,
you said:

“It’s not the latest. Look on any of your moonbat sites or the pollster himself.”

Were you wrong?

yes or no?

(note to readers: I only insisted that this was a recent poll, I never debated/mentioned/discussed the outlier factor of this poll)

also hedo, I wasn’t apologizing before…obviously I was only pointing out you were factually wrong.

just a simple yes or no hedo.[/quote]

100 meters wrote:

"Goodness, I apologized already for posting the current relevant info didn’t I? "

Really?

100 you really aren’t getting it are you. Are you really this dumb or just pretending?

It really sucks when you try and frame the debate with misleading information and nobody falls for it. Maybe the Dems will realize that someday.

And to answer your question it wasn’t the latest poll…based on your own posts. The answer is no. You really are silly you know? The poll you referenced was dated the week of 8/24. You then referenced a second poll taken on 9/1. Both seem to present data contrary to all other polls mentioned…hmm. Good one for Dems to hang their hats on.

So are you really that dumb or just pretending?

51

[quote]ZEB wrote:
100meters wrote:

Uh, which poll was released more recently? Plus you keep forgetting Santorum is a nut. You guys don’t really want Santorum to win do you?

Please present some reasons why you think Santorum is “a nut.”
[/quote]

Just as I thought, you have no reasons.

52

[quote]ZEB wrote:
ZEB wrote:
100meters wrote:

Uh, which poll was released more recently? Plus you keep forgetting Santorum is a nut. You guys don’t really want Santorum to win do you?

Please present some reasons why you think Santorum is “a nut.”

Just as I thought, you have no reasons.

[/quote]

Oops! sorry Zeb, I missed this!
Did you see meet the press? nuff said!

Paraphrasing Russert here:
Mr. Casey, how will you fix all the things Sen. Santorum has f–ked up?

53

[quote]hedo wrote:
100meters wrote:
Hedo,
you said:

“It’s not the latest. Look on any of your moonbat sites or the pollster himself.”

Were you wrong?

yes or no?

(note to readers: I only insisted that this was a recent poll, I never debated/mentioned/discussed the outlier factor of this poll)

also hedo, I wasn’t apologizing before…obviously I was only pointing out you were factually wrong.

just a simple yes or no hedo.

100 meters wrote:

"Goodness, I apologized already for posting the current relevant info didn’t I? "

Really?

100 you really aren’t getting it are you. Are you really this dumb or just pretending?

It really sucks when you try and frame the debate with misleading information and nobody falls for it. Maybe the Dems will realize that someday.

And to answer your question it wasn’t the latest poll…based on your own posts. The answer is no. You really are silly you know? The poll you referenced was dated the week of 8/24. You then referenced a second poll taken on 9/1. Both seem to present data contrary to all other polls mentioned…hmm. Good one for Dems to hang their hats on.

So are you really that dumb or just pretending?

[/quote]

Was this a yes or no?
Seems like a no.

perhaps you could kindly post the poll more recent than the gallup poll I posted on 8/31. Or explain why its the most recent poll listed at BB’s link or my link? In short its dated the most recent and listed the most recent.

In your next post, just post the poll more recent than the one I gave, as of 8/31. Easy enough?

54

[quote]100meters wrote:
ZEB wrote:
ZEB wrote:
100meters wrote:

Uh, which poll was released more recently? Plus you keep forgetting Santorum is a nut. You guys don’t really want Santorum to win do you?

Please present some reasons why you think Santorum is “a nut.”

Just as I thought, you have no reasons.

Oops! sorry Zeb, I missed this!
Did you see meet the press? nuff said!

Paraphrasing Russert here:
Mr. Casey, how will you fix all the things Sen. Santorum has f–ked up?

[/quote]

So because Timbo thinks Santorum has screwed things up, we should all agree? Russert? gimmee a break…He still thinks the Bills have a shot at the Superbowl.

Now how about a real list of “things” that doesn’t originate from Timbo’s talking points.

55

[quote]100meters wrote:
ZEB wrote:
ZEB wrote:
100meters wrote:

Uh, which poll was released more recently? Plus you keep forgetting Santorum is a nut. You guys don’t really want Santorum to win do you?

Please present some reasons why you think Santorum is “a nut.”

Just as I thought, you have no reasons.

Oops! sorry Zeb, I missed this!
Did you see meet the press? nuff said!

Paraphrasing Russert here:
Mr. Casey, how will you fix all the things Sen. Santorum has f–ked up?

[/quote]

You’re usually a pretty articulate guy. I don’t think I’m going to let you rely on Russerts opinion on this one.

You called him a “nut”…why?

56

[quote]100meters wrote:
hedo wrote:
100meters wrote:
Hedo,
you said:

“It’s not the latest. Look on any of your moonbat sites or the pollster himself.”

Were you wrong?

yes or no?

(note to readers: I only insisted that this was a recent poll, I never debated/mentioned/discussed the outlier factor of this poll)

also hedo, I wasn’t apologizing before…obviously I was only pointing out you were factually wrong.

just a simple yes or no hedo.

100 meters wrote:

"Goodness, I apologized already for posting the current relevant info didn’t I? "

Really?

100 you really aren’t getting it are you. Are you really this dumb or just pretending?

It really sucks when you try and frame the debate with misleading information and nobody falls for it. Maybe the Dems will realize that someday.

And to answer your question it wasn’t the latest poll…based on your own posts. The answer is no. You really are silly you know? The poll you referenced was dated the week of 8/24. You then referenced a second poll taken on 9/1. Both seem to present data contrary to all other polls mentioned…hmm. Good one for Dems to hang their hats on.

So are you really that dumb or just pretending?

Was this a yes or no?
Seems like a no.

perhaps you could kindly post the poll more recent than the gallup poll I posted on 8/31. Or explain why its the most recent poll listed at BB’s link or my link? In short its dated the most recent and listed the most recent.

In your next post, just post the poll more recent than the one I gave, as of 8/31. Easy enough?
[/quote]

Why? That would be answering questions to an argument you are attempting to frame rather ineptly. You posted it why would I defend your argument. See how that goes?

I thought you didn’t apologize but your own quote says otherwise. Enough fucking with you however, it’s not very challenging.

Care to articulate why your think Casey did well? He seemd rather angry and people don’t vote for angry politicians. No wonder they dems are keeping him under wraps. He didn’t seem very prepared or comfortable. He is running against someone but seems to not be for very much. How typical.

57

[quote]100meters wrote:
ZEB wrote:
ZEB wrote:
100meters wrote:

Uh, which poll was released more recently? Plus you keep forgetting Santorum is a nut. You guys don’t really want Santorum to win do you?

Please present some reasons why you think Santorum is “a nut.”

Just as I thought, you have no reasons.

Oops! sorry Zeb, I missed this!
Did you see meet the press? nuff said!

Paraphrasing Russert here:
Mr. Casey, how will you fix all the things Sen. Santorum has f–ked up?

[/quote]

I have not seen the whole thing but good to see you admit to Russert’s obvious bias.

Casey is in fantasyland if he thinks we can simply double the number of Special Forces troops as he stated.

58

[quote]hedo wrote:
100meters wrote:
hedo wrote:
100meters wrote:
Hedo,
you said:

“It’s not the latest. Look on any of your moonbat sites or the pollster himself.”

Were you wrong?

yes or no?

(note to readers: I only insisted that this was a recent poll, I never debated/mentioned/discussed the outlier factor of this poll)

also hedo, I wasn’t apologizing before…obviously I was only pointing out you were factually wrong.

just a simple yes or no hedo.

100 meters wrote:

"Goodness, I apologized already for posting the current relevant info didn’t I? "

Really?

100 you really aren’t getting it are you. Are you really this dumb or just pretending?

It really sucks when you try and frame the debate with misleading information and nobody falls for it. Maybe the Dems will realize that someday.

And to answer your question it wasn’t the latest poll…based on your own posts. The answer is no. You really are silly you know? The poll you referenced was dated the week of 8/24. You then referenced a second poll taken on 9/1. Both seem to present data contrary to all other polls mentioned…hmm. Good one for Dems to hang their hats on.

So are you really that dumb or just pretending?

Was this a yes or no?
Seems like a no.

perhaps you could kindly post the poll more recent than the gallup poll I posted on 8/31. Or explain why its the most recent poll listed at BB’s link or my link? In short its dated the most recent and listed the most recent.

In your next post, just post the poll more recent than the one I gave, as of 8/31. Easy enough?

Why? That would be answering questions to an argument you are attempting to frame rather ineptly. You posted it why would I defend your argument. See how that goes?

I thought you didn’t apologize but your own quote says otherwise. Enough fucking with you however, it’s not very challenging.

Care to articulate why your think Casey did well? He seemd rather angry and people don’t vote for angry politicians. No wonder they dems are keeping him under wraps. He didn’t seem very prepared or comfortable. He is running against someone but seems to not be for very much. How typical.

[/quote]

I didn’t say Casey did well. To me he kind of looks creepy, but Santorum just digs his own hole whenever he talks. It was kind of funny actually. Casey did ok (no dems like casey by the way) but didn’t have all the answers of how to fix all the things Santorum has screwed up…the budget, iraq, etc.

It was funny though Santorum almost pleading with Casey: “How will you fix the budget that I broke? Huh, huh? See Tim he can’t even think of the million ways it’ll take to fix my mess. Vote for me!”

59

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
100meters wrote:
ZEB wrote:
ZEB wrote:
100meters wrote:

Uh, which poll was released more recently? Plus you keep forgetting Santorum is a nut. You guys don’t really want Santorum to win do you?

Please present some reasons why you think Santorum is “a nut.”

Just as I thought, you have no reasons.

Oops! sorry Zeb, I missed this!
Did you see meet the press? nuff said!

Paraphrasing Russert here:
Mr. Casey, how will you fix all the things Sen. Santorum has f–ked up?

I have not seen the whole thing but good to see you admit to Russert’s obvious bias.

Casey is in fantasyland if he thinks we can simply double the number of Special Forces troops as he stated.[/quote]

Wasn’t bias. Even Ricky wanted to know how he’d balance the budget that Ricky broke. It was pretty funny.

60

[quote]100meters wrote:
hedo wrote:
100meters wrote:
hedo wrote:
100meters wrote:
Hedo,
you said:

“It’s not the latest. Look on any of your moonbat sites or the pollster himself.”

Were you wrong?

yes or no?

(note to readers: I only insisted that this was a recent poll, I never debated/mentioned/discussed the outlier factor of this poll)

also hedo, I wasn’t apologizing before…obviously I was only pointing out you were factually wrong.

just a simple yes or no hedo.

100 meters wrote:

"Goodness, I apologized already for posting the current relevant info didn’t I? "

Really?

100 you really aren’t getting it are you. Are you really this dumb or just pretending?

It really sucks when you try and frame the debate with misleading information and nobody falls for it. Maybe the Dems will realize that someday.

And to answer your question it wasn’t the latest poll…based on your own posts. The answer is no. You really are silly you know? The poll you referenced was dated the week of 8/24. You then referenced a second poll taken on 9/1. Both seem to present data contrary to all other polls mentioned…hmm. Good one for Dems to hang their hats on.

So are you really that dumb or just pretending?

Was this a yes or no?
Seems like a no.

perhaps you could kindly post the poll more recent than the gallup poll I posted on 8/31. Or explain why its the most recent poll listed at BB’s link or my link? In short its dated the most recent and listed the most recent.

In your next post, just post the poll more recent than the one I gave, as of 8/31. Easy enough?

Why? That would be answering questions to an argument you are attempting to frame rather ineptly. You posted it why would I defend your argument. See how that goes?

I thought you didn’t apologize but your own quote says otherwise. Enough fucking with you however, it’s not very challenging.

Care to articulate why your think Casey did well? He seemd rather angry and people don’t vote for angry politicians. No wonder they dems are keeping him under wraps. He didn’t seem very prepared or comfortable. He is running against someone but seems to not be for very much. How typical.

I didn’t say Casey did well. To me he kind of looks creepy, but Santorum just digs his own hole whenever he talks. It was kind of funny actually. Casey did ok (no dems like casey by the way) but didn’t have all the answers of how to fix all the things Santorum has screwed up…the budget, iraq, etc.

It was funny though Santorum almost pleading with Casey: “How will you fix the budget that I broke? Huh, huh? See Tim he can’t even think of the million ways it’ll take to fix my mess. Vote for me!”[/quote]

I will reiterate it’s pointless to argue with someone like yourself who is delusional. Your sarcasm isn’t even humorous.